The idea of "notaries" is essentially the same idea as having the Certificate Authorities: a third party who is considered trustworth and sufficiently dilligent that the third party would take the appropriate measures to verify something before signing off on it.
Who picks these people/companies?
Why not use a system like PGP, building a web of trust?
The $12,000 is not that hard to believe given the following:
1. have you ever seen what the "regular" phone company charges for international calls? Why do you think that there is such a huge market for things like Skype and the "International Phone Cards" you see in every gas station here in SC?
2. Many countries' phone companies add charges to the phone calls, and of course the phone companies pass those back to the customer. Why should it cost more to call Japan than to call China? It does, because the Japanese phone company charges extra fees, and it's worse if you call a Japanese mobile phone from the US. (It's funny, in many cases it's actually _cheaper_ to call a Chinese mobile phone than to call a Chinese land-line.)
3. Time of the call - the charges discussed above vary based on the time of day. Usually, during "daylight" hours and "work days", calls are more expensive. Given the places called, you're pretty much hosed because unless you timed it carefully, you fit at least one of those conditions either at the origin or the destination.
4. Connection charges. Come phone companies have a "connection" charge for making an international call - an up-front charge before they even start tallying minutes. (Also, most companies round up to the next whole minute, so if you talk for 1 min 1 sec, you're billed for 2 minutes.
The reason there were so many badges is that speakers have the option of receiving their honorarium (small payment for speaking) in the form of three "Human" badges instead of cash. This is a very popular option because the badges are usually some really cool piece of kit and people want to play with them.
If my memory serves, an amateur 7-dan (7D) is one below a professional 1-dan (1P), essentially making 7d the "professional 1kyu" if it existed.
Also, I am not sure if the article was clear on the 2-3 dan being "amateur". Remember, Master Kim simply said "2-3 dan". The professional players refer to their ranks as "dan" as well. Also, an amateur 2-3 dan (4 or 5 kyu if you extend the professional scale down and accept that 7D is one below 1P) should have in no way been able to beat an 8D under any circumstances unless the 8D were haveing a really bad day, was drunk, etc.
Let us keep in mind that the program one by 1.5 points! (that is, 2 stones. White is given a.5 advantage to offset black moving first). In other words, it beat him by two stones/spaces! That is insanely close.
And, actually, my calculation was based on the handicap and worked backward to estimate the rank.
The fact that it actually beat him, to me, supports the idea that Master Kim meant 2-3P, not 2-3D when he said "2-3 dan". He was especially impressed with a couple of "5-dan" moves. A 5-dan amateur move would hardly impress an 8P player.
It seems that many people are missing a fundamental point that makes all of this so interesting: it was only a 9-stone handicap.
That is the largest handicap you would expect to see in tournament play. In this case, it would be given to a 2nd kyu player against the 8th dan Master Kim. The handicap is traditionally calculated by subtracting the lower player's rank from the higher and that gives the number of stones. Taking advantage of the number 0 here to make this work, we can use it and negative numbers to extend the plan into the kyu ranks.
Rankings:
30th kyu, 29th kyu.... 2nd kyu, 1st kyu, 1st dan, 2nd dan,..., 8th dan, 9th dan, 10th dan.
It stops at 10th dan, which is the highest. Any kyu rank below 9th is a concession to _really_ amateur players to have some form of ranking system that meshes into the existing system.
Now... the dan ranks are simply their numbers. But, if we remember the old "number lines" from grade school and place the 0 at the 1st kyu, we can see that we have 1st kyu = 0, 2nd kyu = -1, 3rd kyu = -2, etc.
Handicap:
Therefore, if you do the math 8th dan - 2nd kyu = 8 - -1 = 9, you arrive at a 9-stone handicap.
In standard Japanese rules, the handicap stones are placed on the "star" points, the ones with the black dots on them on the board. There are only 9.
The handicap system was designed to even out the match. It was determined that giving extra initial placements in this manner would improve the weaker player's position to a point where the match was considered "even", allowing weaker players to have a chance at defeating a stronger player, but more importantly, to give the weaker player a chance to play a stronger player without it being a complete slaughter. (It is considered very bad form to refuse a handicap that is properly calculated, by the way.)
Thus, with this 9-stone handicap it should not be THAT much of a surprise that the computer won, except that it does mean that the computer played at the level of at least a 2nd kyu player. I will cede to Master Kim's assessment of the computer's strength as 2nd or 3rd dan, of course, due to Master Kim's own rank. I was speaking strictly from the mathematics of the handicapping system.
This is significant in that the computer is playing inside the range of a decent human player. This is new. This is different. This has never been done before to this extent. Because of the search space for Go, this is a significant accomplishment, even with 800-cores.
What it does is it tells us that we are better at designing algorithms and better at using parallel systems as well as having better hardware to throw at the problem. This was not simply more hardware with an old algorithm, or it would not have been able to do as well.
Always consider the source when evaluating a comment.
Verisign are in the business of addressing this exact problem. In Mr. Silva's ideal world, everyone has a Verisign certificate and then (in theory, anyway) there is no way for someone to be directed to the wrong site because the certificate validation will alert the user.
Has anyone priced a Verisign certificate lately? Verisign stand to profit significantly from this, and Mr. Silva's downplaying of the risk is exactly what he should do. People will want to know why he's so confident, and he'll just respond with what essentially will be a sales pitch complete with fear, uncertainty, and doubt. He'll impress upon the listener that (again, in his view) a Verisign certificate is the only way to protect your web site and yourself.
To abuse a Slashdot meme...
1. Massive vulnerability in DNS makes people distrust DNS
2. Company markets certificates to "verify" that web sites are what they are supposed to be.
3. ??? (Actually, I think this would be have MS make the certificate warning REALLY "in your face" to scare the end user.)
4. Create some new trust mechanism that supposedly cannot be broken.
5. Include a significant financial barrier to this trust mechanism.
6a. Profit!! For some, and bankrupcy for others. 6b. Small, independant software developers, web sites, blogs, etc. are closed out of the Internet and fade away. 6c. We have an "Internet" ruled by whomever controls #4 and #5, above. This can be a government, one or more large corporations, etc. 6d. More profit for those who survive.
Then we have no competition, little innovation, and a highly controlled information distribution medium. The people will be told only what those who control that network want them to be told.
Remember, "The power of the press belongs to him who owns one." I can't remember who said that.
If 1, 2, and 3 from the parent post happen, I cannot imagine these additional steps happening as well. It would be too easy.
The CAPTCHA is "create". What do we need to create to prevent this dystopian future of the Internet?
I have reviewed your website and I believe that I understand your objectives and how you intend for this device to be used. To aid literacy, it takes the place of a literate person reading the book to the learner.
I know that cost is an issue and that affordability in the target area is a major concern, but I am curious as to why there is no display, not even a simple LED/LCD display similar to that on several toys, such as the "Speak-and-Spell"?
My concern here is that if the physical book is lost, your device essentially becomes an inexpensive music player and its purpose fails.
And if that was not bad enough, the word "hacker" is also used in golf to refer to someone who plays occasionally and poorly. (Usually the sort who borrow other people's clubs, too.)
No, I do _not_ play golf. I work with too many people who do.
It's not about people. It's about businesses. It's about BIG businesses, the kinds that can contribute large sums of money to political candidates. They're not interested in the little Chinese restaurant in the town where I live. They're not interested in the local Chiropractor's office. They're only interested in significant contributors... not significant contributors to society, but significant contributors to their campaign funds.
This country is going down hill far too rapidly. How do I get off of this ride before it crashes?
I hate to break it to you, but adultery is illegal in several states in the USA. For example, a very quick search on Google reveals http://www.vanwagnerwood.com/CM/Custom/Adultery.asp that it is illegal in Wisconson.
The 1541 floppy drive (the floppy drive used with the C64) had its own processor and memory. A popular (and fun) "trick" was to write code that would load into the 1541's memory and run on its processor, and have it talk to the C64. Essentially, a two-processor "cluster" back in the 1980's.
The C64 was a wonderful "playground" for experimentation.
That is an excellent point, and I believe it to be quite valid.
However, I think that part of the issue lies not in the "cloud" itself but in the hardware that is used to access the cloud. This looks like a variation on the old "network computer" theme that was making the rounds about 8-10 years ago.
It is one thing to access applications on a distant server, it is entirely different to be dependent on those distant servers for all computer functionality (other than the obvious booting into the "cloud" OS, though even that can be network dependent).
If the move is toward that network-centric and network-depenedent model of computing, then I must agree that your predictions of the demise of third-party software vendors may be warranted.
No offence intended, but I sincerely hope that you are wrong.
In a strange way, I see it as a fitting end to Mr. Doohan's physical form. He inspired countless young people to pursue careers in the sciences, and then, even after leaving this world, continues to inspire.
I know that the body is not the person, and I would like to think that his spirit lives on. At least in this way he can be thought of as being everywhere. Scotty was a fictional character, but through that character James Doohan inspired so many people to believe in themselves.
Rest in Peace, Mr. Doohan. You will be missed, but never forgotten.
You are correct. She was the first female known to land a triple axel (note the spelling) in competition. She was well known for being very polite, kind, and an over-all nice person. (She was also quite cute in her day.)
This may sound like a wild conspiracy theory, but perhaps the motherboard manufacturer is testing a mechanism that will be used in future versions of the X-BOX? Can you imagine how embarassing it must be to Steve Ballmer when he reads about people running Linux on his precious X-Box? A Microsoft-branded machine running the "enemy" Linux.
From what I've read about the disassembly of the BIOS, it seems like a blatant attempt to make sure that the machine ONLY works for Windows. This is different from only testing it for Windows. This appears to be a clear attempt to prevent it from working on any other OS.
Again, it looks like they're trying to position themselves for the X-Box motherboard market if they can make this work.
["I am not pro-religion - but I am a believer in God and of salvation through Christ" contradict yourself much there?]
Actually, to many Christians that is not a contradition at all. If we remember Voltaire's saying "if you wish to converse with me, we must first define our terms.", we then can realize that we need to understand the meanings of the words in order to understand what is being said.
This is not a Bill Clinton "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" situation, but something much simpler.
"Religion" can be understood as "An organized system of beliefs by which man relates to a higher being." When some Christians say that they are not "pro-religion", they may mean simply that they are not for "organized" religion, such as a large denomination. There are myriad "independant" churches in the USA that are not part of any larger organization. There is no denominational council, there is no "Pope" or "Archbishop of Cantebury", or whoever the Eastern Orthodox version would be.
For many people, the word "religion" means "organized religion". This person may simply not participate in any large organization, but still maintains his or her beliefs.
So, no, this person may not see a contradition in his or her own mind. Please try to be a bit kinder.
["validating the resurrection is not difficult"
actually it's impossible, since no verifiable resurrection has occurred that modern science has been able to observe and your primary example of christ happened 2000 years ago and doesn't even occur in this earliest known bible.]
Well, the bit about it not occuring in the "earliest known Bible" is not correct, as pointed out by many other posters, but I cannot fault your reasoning otherwise. You may be correct in that there may be no scientific way to prove these events. (I am not aware of any, but I am not going to make a definitive statement to that effect without additional research on the matter.) While much can be said about people being willing to die for their beliefs, and that some would hold that willingness to die as "proof" of the veracity of those beliefs, I suspect that the willingness to die serves only as evidence of the perceived veracity of the beliefs in the eyes of those willing to die for them.
["but there will always be a missing piece without the existance of God. "
and there is the difference between us. when i see a missing piece to a puzzle i use science to find the truth, you primitive savages fill it with god.]
Could you please be a little more civil? Calling someone a "primitive savage" is not necessary, especially when trying to engage in what I hope was an attempt at intelligent discourse and debate.
There are many questions which modern science cannot answer. Some are comfortable with that "vacuum" of information and are capable of existing with that void. Others, for whatever reason, find such a void difficult to tolerate and will attempt either to ignore it or fill it with something that makes enough sense to them that they can continue without the uncertainty that the void of understanding would cause.
I've had this debate with people who are well educated in this topic. I am not a Biblical languages scholar, but I have studied both Biblical Hebrew and Biblical (Koine) Greek.
Hebrew, like any other semitic language, includes spaces between words under normal circumstances. They reduced (or seemingly eliminated) the spaces because paper was very expensive in those days and they wanted to be able to fit as much as they could on the paper while maintaining readability. Remember that most of that was passed down by oral tradition, so people were familiar with the content. The written record was there to serve as a teaching tool and a reference.
It was not like modern times where believing households can, and often do, own multiple copies of their respective Scriptures. The only copies of the Torah were found in the Synagogues, the Temple, and perhaps in the houses of some very, very weathly Jews.
Have you ever seen the way that the scrolls are brought out in Synagogue? The pomp and ceremony hints at the immense value (both spiritually and monetarily) that those scrolls represent.
Regarding the use of vowel points (nikud). They first came into common use in about the 9th Century CE as an aid to reading. In Semitic languages, the root meaning of the word is contained in the consonants and the vowels are used to change the part of speech and enhance the meaning. Also, the vowels are just marks above or below the consonants. (With the exception of the letter Aleph.)
I'm sure that we've all seen examples of sentences in English written without vowels. 'm sr tht wv ll sn xmpls f sntncs n nglsh wrttn wtht vwls.
For a native English speaker, it's usually not that difficult to read such a sentence. Similarly, for a literate native Hebrew speaker, reading such a sentence, with the context of the rest of the sentence, and given the fact that the root meaning of a word in any Semitic language is tied only to the consonant clusters, it makes sense that there would be little need for vowels.
Have you ever spoken with a non-native English speaker, especially someone whose native language is grammatically very different than English, such as a Chinese person? How about a Chinese person whose English is not very good? Have you noticed how they will often forget to use "the", or how they will use the wrong verb forms? You still understand what they are saying, though, from the context.
And, by the way, the Hebrew word in that commandment is usually considered to mean "commit murder". "Thou shalt not kill." was a simplification intended to make it easier for the uneducated masses to understand.
I believe that you are partly correct in your assertion that cloud computing is, eseentially, marketing hype intended to move us toward renting software.
One advantage that cloud computing has over your proposed solution is that you are not paying for the idle time where your rack of computers is not doing anything. You only pay for what you use (within limits - I suspect a cellphone-like billing plan will emerge). This and the rapid scalability would be wonderful for smaller businesses.
Imagine that you have minimal needs during most of the year - word processing, billing, etc, but on a quarterly basis you need to do your taxes (US businesses normally must file tax reports on a quarterly basis) and on an annual basis you need to do a large amount of computing - employee tax records, inventory, other annual processing. With cloud computing, if you are willing to accept having your data somewhere else that is not in your physical control, you simply ramp-up the computing need in December and then you're done. You finish on time and have a larger "bill" at the end of the month. This is very much like electricity - in cooler months you don't run your AC in the house, but when a heat wave comes along you run the AC more and you just pay a higher bill. You don't maintain your own power generation capacity, you simply use more of the available supply when you need it.
One of the nice ideas behind "cloud" computing is that computational is treated as a consumable resource, much like electricity. Cloud computing, in that way at least, is similar to "grid computing". The differences are important, however.
"Grid" computing is related to raw computing power being distributed for a large problem. Cloud computing, on the other hand, is not so much about one user being able to access huge amounts of processing power at once as it is about making computing resources available on demand and from anywhere.
Imagine it like this for a moment: every device that plugs into a wall outlet has its own "power meter" like the one that the electric company use to determine how much to bill you each month. (Let's not go into a discussion about estimates, how often they really read the meters, etc., please. This is only an analogy.) You can take your devices anywhere, and when you plug it into the wall the little meter records how much electricity you use.
So, when you are at a hotel, a friend's house, or the public library, you are still being billed personally for the electricity that your laptop computer is using. You can do what you like with the electricity as long as you don't violate any laws of physics and as long as you stay within the limits of your connection or access. (In other words, don't try to draw 40 amps from a 20 amp outlet - you'll trip the breaker.)
But, instead of electricity, you are accessing computational services in the form of data storage and software as well as data transfer. The nice thing is that you can access it from anywhere (such as Google Apps) with little dependence on operating system or platform.
If (and this is a big "if") they can work out the security concerns, this could be very useful for large businesses.
I hate to say it, but I am not so sure about that site you listed.
I just checked my name and it says I don't exist.
Well, that's OK, except that the site you listed is in the UK. My family came from the UK. My surname has 6 pages in the Cardiff phone book. My given name is a VERY common man's given name in Wales.
In other words, I find it VERY difficult to believe that there is no one else with my given name / surname combination in the UK.
The "You do not exist" message is rather amusing, though, and good for a laugh.
Slashdot Mirror
The idea of "notaries" is essentially the same idea as having the Certificate Authorities: a third party who is considered trustworth and sufficiently dilligent that the third party would take the appropriate measures to verify something before signing off on it.
Who picks these people/companies?
Why not use a system like PGP, building a web of trust?
Disclaimer: I am a SC Notary Public.
That 60Hz is also a good B-flat in case you need to tune a musical instrument.
The $12,000 is not that hard to believe given the following:
1. have you ever seen what the "regular" phone company charges for international calls? Why do you think that there is such a huge market for things like Skype and the "International Phone Cards" you see in every gas station here in SC?
2. Many countries' phone companies add charges to the phone calls, and of course the phone companies pass those back to the customer. Why should it cost more to call Japan than to call China? It does, because the Japanese phone company charges extra fees, and it's worse if you call a Japanese mobile phone from the US. (It's funny, in many cases it's actually _cheaper_ to call a Chinese mobile phone than to call a Chinese land-line.)
3. Time of the call - the charges discussed above vary based on the time of day. Usually, during "daylight" hours and "work days", calls are more expensive. Given the places called, you're pretty much hosed because unless you timed it carefully, you fit at least one of those conditions either at the origin or the destination.
4. Connection charges. Come phone companies have a "connection" charge for making an international call - an up-front charge before they even start tallying minutes. (Also, most companies round up to the next whole minute, so if you talk for 1 min 1 sec, you're billed for 2 minutes.
So, yes, $12,000 is quite believeable.
The reason there were so many badges is that speakers have the option of receiving their honorarium (small payment for speaking) in the form of three "Human" badges instead of cash. This is a very popular option because the badges are usually some really cool piece of kit and people want to play with them.
If my memory serves, an amateur 7-dan (7D) is one below a professional 1-dan (1P), essentially making 7d the "professional 1kyu" if it existed.
Also, I am not sure if the article was clear on the 2-3 dan being "amateur". Remember, Master Kim simply said "2-3 dan". The professional players refer to their ranks as "dan" as well. Also, an amateur 2-3 dan (4 or 5 kyu if you extend the professional scale down and accept that 7D is one below 1P) should have in no way been able to beat an 8D under any circumstances unless the 8D were haveing a really bad day, was drunk, etc.
Let us keep in mind that the program one by 1.5 points! (that is, 2 stones. White is given a .5 advantage to offset black moving first). In other words, it beat him by two stones/spaces! That is insanely close.
And, actually, my calculation was based on the handicap and worked backward to estimate the rank.
The fact that it actually beat him, to me, supports the idea that Master Kim meant 2-3P, not 2-3D when he said "2-3 dan". He was especially impressed with a couple of "5-dan" moves. A 5-dan amateur move would hardly impress an 8P player.
It seems that many people are missing a fundamental point that makes all of this so interesting: it was only a 9-stone handicap.
That is the largest handicap you would expect to see in tournament play. In this case, it would be given to a 2nd kyu player against the 8th dan Master Kim. The handicap is traditionally calculated by subtracting the lower player's rank from the higher and that gives the number of stones. Taking advantage of the number 0 here to make this work, we can use it and negative numbers to extend the plan into the kyu ranks.
Rankings:
30th kyu, 29th kyu .... 2nd kyu, 1st kyu, 1st dan, 2nd dan, ..., 8th dan, 9th dan, 10th dan.
It stops at 10th dan, which is the highest. Any kyu rank below 9th is a concession to _really_ amateur players to have some form of ranking system that meshes into the existing system.
Now... the dan ranks are simply their numbers. But, if we remember the old "number lines" from grade school and place the 0 at the 1st kyu, we can see that we have 1st kyu = 0, 2nd kyu = -1, 3rd kyu = -2, etc.
Handicap:
Therefore, if you do the math 8th dan - 2nd kyu = 8 - -1 = 9, you arrive at a 9-stone handicap.
In standard Japanese rules, the handicap stones are placed on the "star" points, the ones with the black dots on them on the board. There are only 9.
The handicap system was designed to even out the match. It was determined that giving extra initial placements in this manner would improve the weaker player's position to a point where the match was considered "even", allowing weaker players to have a chance at defeating a stronger player, but more importantly, to give the weaker player a chance to play a stronger player without it being a complete slaughter. (It is considered very bad form to refuse a handicap that is properly calculated, by the way.)
Thus, with this 9-stone handicap it should not be THAT much of a surprise that the computer won, except that it does mean that the computer played at the level of at least a 2nd kyu player. I will cede to Master Kim's assessment of the computer's strength as 2nd or 3rd dan, of course, due to Master Kim's own rank. I was speaking strictly from the mathematics of the handicapping system.
This is significant in that the computer is playing inside the range of a decent human player. This is new. This is different. This has never been done before to this extent. Because of the search space for Go, this is a significant accomplishment, even with 800-cores.
What it does is it tells us that we are better at designing algorithms and better at using parallel systems as well as having better hardware to throw at the problem. This was not simply more hardware with an old algorithm, or it would not have been able to do as well.
Always consider the source when evaluating a comment.
Verisign are in the business of addressing this exact problem. In Mr. Silva's ideal world, everyone has a Verisign certificate and then (in theory, anyway) there is no way for someone to be directed to the wrong site because the certificate validation will alert the user.
Has anyone priced a Verisign certificate lately? Verisign stand to profit significantly from this, and Mr. Silva's downplaying of the risk is exactly what he should do. People will want to know why he's so confident, and he'll just respond with what essentially will be a sales pitch complete with fear, uncertainty, and doubt. He'll impress upon the listener that (again, in his view) a Verisign certificate is the only way to protect your web site and yourself.
To abuse a Slashdot meme...
1. Massive vulnerability in DNS makes people distrust DNS
2. Company markets certificates to "verify" that web sites are what they are supposed to be.
3. ??? (Actually, I think this would be have MS make the certificate warning REALLY "in your face" to scare the end user.)
4. Profit!
The saga continues...
4. Create some new trust mechanism that supposedly cannot be broken.
5. Include a significant financial barrier to this trust mechanism.
6a. Profit!! For some, and bankrupcy for others.
6b. Small, independant software developers, web sites, blogs, etc. are closed out of the Internet and fade away.
6c. We have an "Internet" ruled by whomever controls #4 and #5, above. This can be a government, one or more large corporations, etc.
6d. More profit for those who survive.
Then we have no competition, little innovation, and a highly controlled information distribution medium. The people will be told only what those who control that network want them to be told.
Remember, "The power of the press belongs to him who owns one." I can't remember who said that.
If 1, 2, and 3 from the parent post happen, I cannot imagine these additional steps happening as well. It would be too easy.
The CAPTCHA is "create". What do we need to create to prevent this dystopian future of the Internet?
I have reviewed your website and I believe that I understand your objectives and how you intend for this device to be used. To aid literacy, it takes the place of a literate person reading the book to the learner.
I know that cost is an issue and that affordability in the target area is a major concern, but I am curious as to why there is no display, not even a simple LED/LCD display similar to that on several toys, such as the "Speak-and-Spell"?
My concern here is that if the physical book is lost, your device essentially becomes an inexpensive music player and its purpose fails.
And if that was not bad enough, the word "hacker" is also used in golf to refer to someone who plays occasionally and poorly. (Usually the sort who borrow other people's clubs, too.)
No, I do _not_ play golf. I work with too many people who do.
I think you're on target.
It's not about people. It's about businesses. It's about BIG businesses, the kinds that can contribute large sums of money to political candidates. They're not interested in the little Chinese restaurant in the town where I live. They're not interested in the local Chiropractor's office. They're only interested in significant contributors ... not significant contributors to society, but significant contributors to their campaign funds.
This country is going down hill far too rapidly. How do I get off of this ride before it crashes?
I hate to break it to you, but adultery is illegal in several states in the USA. For example, a very quick search on Google reveals http://www.vanwagnerwood.com/CM/Custom/Adultery.asp that it is illegal in Wisconson.
I am not condoning the troll's actions.
The 1541 floppy drive (the floppy drive used with the C64) had its own processor and memory. A popular (and fun) "trick" was to write code that would load into the 1541's memory and run on its processor, and have it talk to the C64. Essentially, a two-processor "cluster" back in the 1980's.
The C64 was a wonderful "playground" for experimentation.
That is an excellent point, and I believe it to be quite valid.
However, I think that part of the issue lies not in the "cloud" itself but in the hardware that is used to access the cloud. This looks like a variation on the old "network computer" theme that was making the rounds about 8-10 years ago.
It is one thing to access applications on a distant server, it is entirely different to be dependent on those distant servers for all computer functionality (other than the obvious booting into the "cloud" OS, though even that can be network dependent).
If the move is toward that network-centric and network-depenedent model of computing, then I must agree that your predictions of the demise of third-party software vendors may be warranted.
No offence intended, but I sincerely hope that you are wrong.
In a strange way, I see it as a fitting end to Mr. Doohan's physical form. He inspired countless young people to pursue careers in the sciences, and then, even after leaving this world, continues to inspire.
I know that the body is not the person, and I would like to think that his spirit lives on. At least in this way he can be thought of as being everywhere. Scotty was a fictional character, but through that character James Doohan inspired so many people to believe in themselves.
Rest in Peace, Mr. Doohan. You will be missed, but never forgotten.
You are correct. She was the first female known to land a triple axel (note the spelling) in competition. She was well known for being very polite, kind, and an over-all nice person. (She was also quite cute in her day.)
This may sound like a wild conspiracy theory, but perhaps the motherboard manufacturer is testing a mechanism that will be used in future versions of the X-BOX? Can you imagine how embarassing it must be to Steve Ballmer when he reads about people running Linux on his precious X-Box? A Microsoft-branded machine running the "enemy" Linux.
From what I've read about the disassembly of the BIOS, it seems like a blatant attempt to make sure that the machine ONLY works for Windows. This is different from only testing it for Windows. This appears to be a clear attempt to prevent it from working on any other OS.
Again, it looks like they're trying to position themselves for the X-Box motherboard market if they can make this work.
I would like to address some of your comments.
["I am not pro-religion - but I am a believer in God and of salvation through Christ"
contradict yourself much there?]
Actually, to many Christians that is not a contradition at all. If we remember Voltaire's saying "if you wish to converse with me, we must first define our terms.", we then can realize that we need to understand the meanings of the words in order to understand what is being said.
This is not a Bill Clinton "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" situation, but something much simpler.
"Religion" can be understood as "An organized system of beliefs by which man relates to a higher being." When some Christians say that they are not "pro-religion", they may mean simply that they are not for "organized" religion, such as a large denomination. There are myriad "independant" churches in the USA that are not part of any larger organization. There is no denominational council, there is no "Pope" or "Archbishop of Cantebury", or whoever the Eastern Orthodox version would be.
For many people, the word "religion" means "organized religion". This person may simply not participate in any large organization, but still maintains his or her beliefs.
So, no, this person may not see a contradition in his or her own mind. Please try to be a bit kinder.
["validating the resurrection is not difficult"
actually it's impossible, since no verifiable resurrection has occurred that modern science has been able to observe and your primary example of christ happened 2000 years ago and doesn't even occur in this earliest known bible.]
Well, the bit about it not occuring in the "earliest known Bible" is not correct, as pointed out by many other posters, but I cannot fault your reasoning otherwise. You may be correct in that there may be no scientific way to prove these events. (I am not aware of any, but I am not going to make a definitive statement to that effect without additional research on the matter.) While much can be said about people being willing to die for their beliefs, and that some would hold that willingness to die as "proof" of the veracity of those beliefs, I suspect that the willingness to die serves only as evidence of the perceived veracity of the beliefs in the eyes of those willing to die for them.
["but there will always be a missing piece without the existance of God. "
and there is the difference between us. when i see a missing piece to a puzzle i use science to find the truth, you primitive savages fill it with god.]
Could you please be a little more civil? Calling someone a "primitive savage" is not necessary, especially when trying to engage in what I hope was an attempt at intelligent discourse and debate.
There are many questions which modern science cannot answer. Some are comfortable with that "vacuum" of information and are capable of existing with that void. Others, for whatever reason, find such a void difficult to tolerate and will attempt either to ignore it or fill it with something that makes enough sense to them that they can continue without the uncertainty that the void of understanding would cause.
I've had this debate with people who are well educated in this topic. I am not a Biblical languages scholar, but I have studied both Biblical Hebrew and Biblical (Koine) Greek.
Hebrew, like any other semitic language, includes spaces between words under normal circumstances. They reduced (or seemingly eliminated) the spaces because paper was very expensive in those days and they wanted to be able to fit as much as they could on the paper while maintaining readability. Remember that most of that was passed down by oral tradition, so people were familiar with the content. The written record was there to serve as a teaching tool and a reference.
It was not like modern times where believing households can, and often do, own multiple copies of their respective Scriptures. The only copies of the Torah were found in the Synagogues, the Temple, and perhaps in the houses of some very, very weathly Jews.
Have you ever seen the way that the scrolls are brought out in Synagogue? The pomp and ceremony hints at the immense value (both spiritually and monetarily) that those scrolls represent.
Regarding the use of vowel points (nikud). They first came into common use in about the 9th Century CE as an aid to reading. In Semitic languages, the root meaning of the word is contained in the consonants and the vowels are used to change the part of speech and enhance the meaning. Also, the vowels are just marks above or below the consonants. (With the exception of the letter Aleph.)
I'm sure that we've all seen examples of sentences in English written without vowels.
'm sr tht wv ll sn xmpls f sntncs n nglsh wrttn wtht vwls.
For a native English speaker, it's usually not that difficult to read such a sentence. Similarly, for a literate native Hebrew speaker, reading such a sentence, with the context of the rest of the sentence, and given the fact that the root meaning of a word in any Semitic language is tied only to the consonant clusters, it makes sense that there would be little need for vowels.
Have you ever spoken with a non-native English speaker, especially someone whose native language is grammatically very different than English, such as a Chinese person? How about a Chinese person whose English is not very good? Have you noticed how they will often forget to use "the", or how they will use the wrong verb forms? You still understand what they are saying, though, from the context.
And, by the way, the Hebrew word in that commandment is usually considered to mean "commit murder". "Thou shalt not kill." was a simplification intended to make it easier for the uneducated masses to understand.
I believe that you are partly correct in your assertion that cloud computing is, eseentially, marketing hype intended to move us toward renting software.
One advantage that cloud computing has over your proposed solution is that you are not paying for the idle time where your rack of computers is not doing anything. You only pay for what you use (within limits - I suspect a cellphone-like billing plan will emerge). This and the rapid scalability would be wonderful for smaller businesses.
Imagine that you have minimal needs during most of the year - word processing, billing, etc, but on a quarterly basis you need to do your taxes (US businesses normally must file tax reports on a quarterly basis) and on an annual basis you need to do a large amount of computing - employee tax records, inventory, other annual processing. With cloud computing, if you are willing to accept having your data somewhere else that is not in your physical control, you simply ramp-up the computing need in December and then you're done. You finish on time and have a larger "bill" at the end of the month. This is very much like electricity - in cooler months you don't run your AC in the house, but when a heat wave comes along you run the AC more and you just pay a higher bill. You don't maintain your own power generation capacity, you simply use more of the available supply when you need it.
One of the nice ideas behind "cloud" computing is that computational is treated as a consumable resource, much like electricity. Cloud computing, in that way at least, is similar to "grid computing". The differences are important, however.
"Grid" computing is related to raw computing power being distributed for a large problem. Cloud computing, on the other hand, is not so much about one user being able to access huge amounts of processing power at once as it is about making computing resources available on demand and from anywhere.
Imagine it like this for a moment: every device that plugs into a wall outlet has its own "power meter" like the one that the electric company use to determine how much to bill you each month. (Let's not go into a discussion about estimates, how often they really read the meters, etc., please. This is only an analogy.) You can take your devices anywhere, and when you plug it into the wall the little meter records how much electricity you use.
So, when you are at a hotel, a friend's house, or the public library, you are still being billed personally for the electricity that your laptop computer is using. You can do what you like with the electricity as long as you don't violate any laws of physics and as long as you stay within the limits of your connection or access. (In other words, don't try to draw 40 amps from a 20 amp outlet - you'll trip the breaker.)
But, instead of electricity, you are accessing computational services in the form of data storage and software as well as data transfer. The nice thing is that you can access it from anywhere (such as Google Apps) with little dependence on operating system or platform.
If (and this is a big "if") they can work out the security concerns, this could be very useful for large businesses.
If you're correct...
1. build massive wind farms
2. global COOLING! (Offset global warming)
3. ???
4. President Al Gore
No wild cards. I simply entered my name. That's what makes it seem so strange.
You could use this http://xkcd.com/327/ as an idea for how to change your name. :-)
(XKCD is great!)
I hate to say it, but I am not so sure about that site you listed.
I just checked my name and it says I don't exist.
Well, that's OK, except that the site you listed is in the UK.
My family came from the UK.
My surname has 6 pages in the Cardiff phone book.
My given name is a VERY common man's given name in Wales.
In other words, I find it VERY difficult to believe that there is no one else with my given name / surname combination in the UK.
The "You do not exist" message is rather amusing, though, and good for a laugh.
With a name like "RAmen" I am not sure you are a true Pastafarian, since you have chosen to name yourself after some other type of noodle.
I call hypocracy! :-)